Federer must make the switch or he will descend even more

Half the people in this thread are only here because they use a 90 and are still trying to convince themselves it's best for their game. If fed went bigger then I guarantee all those same people would preach for whatever racquet he changes to. Sampras himself said that he should have switched, c'mon it doesn't get any more blatant than that. I was talking with peter smith( USC coach) a while ago and he said he wishes they had babolats and other tweener frames when he was playing more because of the huge advantage they give. Switched would help him. For his game a 95 would be perfect. Granted, there is always an adjustment time, but it does improve your game

Half the people in this thread are only here because they use a 90 and are still trying to convince themselves it's best for their game. If fed went bigger then I guarantee all those same people would preach for whatever racquet he changes to. Sampras himself said that he should have switched, c'mon it doesn't get any more blatant than that. I was talking with peter smith( USC coach) a while ago and he said he wishes they had babolats and other tweener frames when he was playing more because of the huge advantage they give. Switched would help him. For his game a 95 would be perfect. Granted, there is always an adjustment time, but it does improve your game

Click to expand...

Yeah, and I guess I should have bought a lottery ticket last night because if I did, of course I would have won the mega jackpot. Sampras could have switched and not won another tournament. And do you know what he'd be saying today? He'd be saying that he should have never switched. The grass is always greener on the other side. Would've, could've, should've.

Oh, and my game improved when I switched from a 95 to a 90, and has improved again after I switched from a 90 to an 85.

"Oh, and my game improved when I switched from a 95 to a 90, and has improved again after I switched from a 90 to an 85."

Sorry, but I believe that this is only true because you really want it to be, or the level of your opponents has lowered. It's ludicrous to suggest that going in that direction has improved your game. Maybe you are more comfortable using them, but you haven't improved with them. Do your opponents all play with wooden racquets, by chance? If so, I retract everything.

Also, you can not say that the Pure Drive and the Aero Pro have not had a resounding competitive effect on the game as a whole. Look at Schiavone.. Errani.. Radwanska, among many others. They're wee-folks. They would be nothing without their current racquets! They've actually all become quite something, with them.

And there's enough "impact" players using Speedport technology to validate its prevalence as a breakthrough design.

"Oh, and my game improved when I switched from a 95 to a 90, and has improved again after I switched from a 90 to an 85."

Sorry, but I believe that this is only true because you really want it to be, or the level of your opponents has lowered. It's ludicrous to suggest that going in that direction has improved your game. Maybe you are more comfortable using them, but you haven't improved with them. Do your opponents all play with wooden racquets, by chance? If so, I retract everything.

Also, you can not say that the Pure Drive and the Aero Pro have not had a resounding competitive effect on the game as a whole. Look at Schiavone.. Errani.. Radwanska, among many others. They're wee-folks. They would be nothing without their current racquets! They've actually all become quite something, with them.

And there's enough "impact" players using Speedport technology to validate its prevalence as a breakthrough design.

- Ferrer
- Isner
- Davydenko
- Bryans
- Ferrero
- Andujar

... for starters. Come now.

Click to expand...

So are you suggesting that without Speedport "technology", none of those pros on your list would ever make it as pros?

I'm sure all of them would do just fine using a POG, which came out in 1978. BTW, the POG is still a better racquet than any new Speedport racquet, so I'd say the technology has gotten worse and worse over the past 35 years.

I can hit bigger serves and bigger and more accurate forehands and get more spin using an 85 than I can with a 90. I would certainly call that an improvement. The 85 is also more stable and has better feel than the 90. BTW, I've also beaten opponents who used modern oversized graphite racquets by using a 65 sq. in. wood racquet. :shock:

Didn't Sampras also say that if he would've switched to a bigger head size later on in his career it would have helped/extended his career??

Also, pros switch rackets in the off season all the time. Why is it, when the WTFs are in early November, that Fed cant devote 3-4 weeks to getting used to a bigger size head. Then he can play an exo or two, or a warmup tournament to get further acclimated.

I think he's being stubborn, just like Sampras was.

10 yrs from now, when he's playing exos, we'll see him with a blacked out Babolat as well, maybe.

Click to expand...

Agreed, I also think its laughable to think that Fed, will start losing go guys in rds he doesnt usually lose in.... the racket might hinder his play but not the deciding facttor against lesser comp. Then in those matches like against Tsonga the old racket clearly not geting it done. Use the offseason, and early rds to make the switch... More of a chance the bigger head helps agains quarterfinal opponents than hurts against 1st to 4th rd opponents.

Didn't Sampras also say that if he would've switched to a bigger head size later on in his career it would have helped/extended his career??

Also, pros switch rackets in the off season all the time. Why is it, when the WTFs are in early November, that Fed cant devote 3-4 weeks to getting used to a bigger size head. Then he can play an exo or two, or a warmup tournament to get further acclimated.

I think he's being stubborn, just like Sampras was.

10 yrs from now, when he's playing exos, we'll see him with a blacked out Babolat as well, maybe.

Click to expand...

Well most players just change to a different paint job. And there has been plenty stories of players going into a slump after changing racket(sponsor).

"Oh, and my game improved when I switched from a 95 to a 90, and has improved again after I switched from a 90 to an 85."

Sorry, but I believe that this is only true because you really want it to be, or the level of your opponents has lowered. It's ludicrous to suggest that going in that direction has improved your game. Maybe you are more comfortable using them, but you haven't improved with them. Do your opponents all play with wooden racquets, by chance? If so, I retract everything.

Also, you can not say that the Pure Drive and the Aero Pro have not had a resounding competitive effect on the game as a whole. Look at Schiavone.. Errani.. Radwanska, among many others. They're wee-folks. They would be nothing without their current racquets! They've actually all become quite something, with them.

And there's enough "impact" players using Speedport technology to validate its prevalence as a breakthrough design.

- Ferrer
- Isner
- Davydenko
- Bryans
- Ferrero
- Andujar

... for starters. Come now.

Click to expand...

To be fair, some pros using Speedport tech use the grommet inserts to make them play more like traditional frames. Volkl had large/wide grommet tech years ago too - the V1 line has had wide grommet tech for at least a decade or more. All I can see it does is give you slightly longer string length at the ports. A person playing with a 95" head could get the same effect by playing with a 97".

Tweeners are popular but 18 of the top 25 ATP are using thin beam rackets and not wider/thicker and stiffer Babs/or similar.

We all like to believe racket tech is critical and will give us a magical advantage but pros are predominately playing with heavy and thin rackets that allow them to control the ball and provide the power.

I will concede that tweener rackets - as in wider and stiffer - are more predominate on the WTA. And, most male rec players are probably closer to WTA in size, strength, racket head speed, .. than ATP.

So, I think it is preference. I like 95-98" heads, thin, moderate flex and fairly heavy.

I do think Fed could play very well with a 95" prostaff setup just like his 90" and maybe increase the tension a bit. But, he is a big boy and knows what he wants.

When I don't move my feet, feeling lazy or playing with a hangover I don't play very well with a mid. Mid plus rackets are definitely easier to play with on that day.

But Roger Federer - who has 17 more slams than I (and most pros ) do - doesn't have that problem I think. So will the same rule of thumb that applies to me apply to RF as well?
Uhhhh I don't know...........I don't know :-|

When I don't move my feet, feeling lazy or playing with a hangover I don't play very well with a mid. Mid plus rackets are definitely easier to play with on that day.

But Roger Federer - who has 17 more slams than I (and most pros ) do - doesn't have that problem I think. So will the same rule of thumb that applies to me apply to RF as well?
Uhhhh I don't know...........I don't know :-|

Click to expand...

I understand your point, the guy above about tech not being critical, but in that same sense we have seen some guys change their equipment and it be a great move like when Fed changed, Davydenko changed or horrible like when Safin changed, Ivan lubjicic moved to head. Its also finny when people say when "I dont play well", ok, no respect for the other half of the equation? Your opponent at that level has a good deal with what you can do. It also may mean using something with a little more capability so you take advantage of the points you have control in, or the neutral ones to take advantage of first. Its not going to cover age but it could make neutral balls heavier staying neutral, keep you from working so hard physically and mentally because your racket gives you nothing in return on serves, returns and playing defense. I stll belive he would benefit from a 95, especially against the top opponents while not hurting him agains lesser opponents.

Its not just about changing equipment, its about taking advantage of the change. Connors didnt change from the T racket because he couldnt adapt to the lighter more powerful racket. He played with little spin, his stroke was too grooved for the plowthrough of the lead pipe rackets. Big difference moving from wood to metal, or metal to composite frames or some hybrid.. We are talking a little more surface area an spin potential not a complete change of playability.

Federer has been using the same racquet since he was 13 years old. It may have increased to 90 instead of 85 but nobody know - but it the same old racquet - difference colors every two years or so but same old, same old. I think it still the 85 square inches however.

You know who REALLY needs to change his racquet? David Ferrer. Apparently, that huge Prince racquet of his just isn't big enough for him to beat the Big Four. And since he's about the same age as Federer now, he really should be using something that's at least 120 sq. in. :shock:

Yes, if he retired today and joined the senior's tour where he only has to play against the likes of McEnroe and Lendl.

Click to expand...

if the racquet is so perfectly suited to his game why would he ever switch? Even if you're playing exos only there is no reason to switch unless you feel like something else would be better. If Petros felt like he would play better with the PS85 then he'd still be using that.

if the racquet is so perfectly suited to his game why would he ever switch? Even if you're playing exos only there is no reason to switch unless you feel like something else would be better. If Petros felt like he would play better with the PS85 then he'd still be using that.

Click to expand...

Someone will pay him? Once he's on the Senior Tour he'll be playing just to raise money for his Foundation.

if the racquet is so perfectly suited to his game why would he ever switch? Even if you're playing exos only there is no reason to switch unless you feel like something else would be better. If Petros felt like he would play better with the PS85 then he'd still be using that.

Click to expand...

When I play matches that don't matter, I use all sorts of racquets that I don't normally use if I was actually trying to win.

He's not due on court for 5+ more weeks. Wilson should see what they can come up with. Also, it's pretty weird seeing how riled up people got in 2010 after Federer fell to #3. Could be a while before he gets back there, if ever.

Nadals problem isn't equipment. Its his knees or some other reason people claim. Feds problem is that hes getting old. He just cant get to the balls as easily as he used to. Im not saying a bigger racquet but maybe something easier to play with that gives him a boost of power that he could utilize to end points earlier. Yes his accuracy would decrease but hes not going for those types of shots anymore. He plays way more inside the lines these days and uses more topspin. I truly believe a different racquet would benefit his new type of play. Maybe get some more aces and more winners. Wouldnt hurt to do something different.

So how much bigger than 100 sq. in. should Nadal switch to seeing that he lost even earlier to an even lower ranked opponent?

Click to expand...

Nadal just lost on his worst surface defending 2nd round points. Roger shanked his way out of the tournament as defending champion. I'd say one of them has more incentive than the other to try new, more drastic measures.

Nadals problem isn't equipment. Its his knees or some other reason people claim. Feds problem is that hes getting old. He just cant get to the balls as easily as he used to. Im not saying a bigger racquet but maybe something easier to play with that gives him a boost of power that he could utilize to end points earlier. Yes his accuracy would decrease but hes not going for those types of shots anymore. He plays way more inside the lines these days and uses more topspin. I truly believe a different racquet would benefit his new type of play. Maybe get some more aces and more winners. Wouldnt hurt to do something different.

Click to expand...

And how do you know Federer's current racquet is not the easiest one for him to play with?

Yet more spin would probably not help Federer in many situations and it would also be less powerful (unless he changed frames or how he swung) than gut/poly combo. His balance of pace/spin is a huge part of what makes him successful. I can see the argument for going to a bigger head size but the string combo is so good many of his peers (as well as tons of 3.5 level players on this board :lol: ) have even mimicked it.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. He may shank even more because the bigger frame will get in the way of his fast strokes even more. In the physical world, anything physically bigger will be more obstructive than the same thing that's physically smaller, all else being equal. Besides, shanking is not a problem for Federer with his current racquet as proven by his 17 Slams. :wink:

BTW, I don't shank any more with an 85 than I do with a 95. :smile:

Click to expand...

Here's an old post of mine. ^^^

Well, looks like I was right about Federer's shanking.

So where are all the people who claimed that Federer would shank less if he would just move up to a 95 sq. in. racquet? Because he went even bigger to a 98 sq. in. racquet and he's shanking even more than he did with his 90 sq. in. racquet. :shock: